Hi Peter,
On Tue, Jun 15, 2010 at 11:39:39AM +0200, Peter Korsgaard wrote:
> >>>>> "Sascha" == Sascha Hauer <s.hauer@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> writes:
>
> Sascha> Signed-off-by: Sascha Hauer <s.hauer@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> Sascha> ---
> Sascha> include/random.h | 7 +++++++
> Sascha> lib/Makefile | 1 +
> Sascha> lib/random.c | 22 ++++++++++++++++++++++
> Sascha> 3 files changed, 30 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-)
> Sascha> create mode 100644 include/random.h
> Sascha> create mode 100644 lib/random.c
>
> Sascha> diff --git a/lib/random.c b/lib/random.c
> Sascha> new file mode 100644
> Sascha> index 0000000..25315e7
> Sascha> --- /dev/null
> Sascha> +++ b/lib/random.c
> Sascha> @@ -0,0 +1,22 @@
> Sascha> +#include <common.h>
> Sascha> +#include <random.h>
> Sascha> +
> Sascha> +static int random_seed;
> Sascha> +
> Sascha> +static unsigned char rand(void)
> Sascha> +{
> Sascha> + random_seed = random_seed * 1103515245 + 12345;
> Sascha> + return (unsigned char)(random_seed / 65536) % 256;
> Sascha> +}
>
> Any reason to not make this public and return int instead similar to
> rand(3)?
The reason was that I did not need rand but get_random_bytes and I
wasn't aware that rand() is that close to the corresponding libc
function.
>
> We could presumably simply do:
>
> #define RAND_MAX 255
>
> And to be completely correct, these prototypes should be in stdlib.h
> instead.
Ok, will do.
Sascha
--
Pengutronix e.K. | |
Industrial Linux Solutions | http://www.pengutronix.de/ |
Peiner Str. 6-8, 31137 Hildesheim, Germany | Phone: +49-5121-206917-0 |
Amtsgericht Hildesheim, HRA 2686 | Fax: +49-5121-206917-5555 |
_______________________________________________
barebox mailing list
barebox@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/barebox
